your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes
Wolfgang Bangerth
bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
Fri May 23 14:18:00 GMT 2003
> Right now, in order to change to CLOSED, you need to edit the bug two times,
> and this is suboptimal.
I wasn't even aware of this. Which might or might not indicate that the
process is too complicated.
Regarding the existence of the two states at all: I have argued previously
that that's unnecessary. Nathanael says that we need them for the
otherwise lack of QA in gcc, but I think that's not correct: every patch
for a bug should come with a testcase, so at least in theory a bug that
has once been fixed cannot reappear because it would show up in the
testsuite.
I get the feeling that this requirement is quite thoroughly handled. If it
is not in some cases, then I think it is an undue burden on the bugzilla
people if they have to maintain two states for _all_ bug reports. It's an
undue burden because it can't be their responsibility to enforce the
testcase rule, but they would be forced to bear the consequences.
I would also like to posit that quite a number of bugs will then stay
RESOLVED indefinitely. If someone, say, fixes a bug on mn10200 or some
other obscure target, who's going to double-check after a release and put
in into CLOSED?
W.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/
More information about the Gcc
mailing list